About your Search

20130318
20130326
SHOW
Cavuto 7
( more )
STATION
MSNBCW 52
CSPAN 34
CSPAN2 33
CNNW 25
FBC 25
CNBC 22
KGO (ABC) 21
SFGTV 20
CURRENT 12
SFGTV2 10
KNTV (NBC) 8
KQED (PBS) 8
KRCB (PBS) 5
KCSM (PBS) 3
KOFY 3
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 341
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 341 (some duplicates have been removed)
plunging into the level of debt and deficit spending that has been taking place here over the past several years. eventually we're going to reach that tipping point. when we reach that tip point, investors and consumer lose conference. and when that happens, interest rates right. and when interest rates rise, it impacts our economy in a very significantly negative way. all we have to do is look across the atlantic at europe and what's happening there to get a glimpse of the crisis that can come from not dealing with ever-increasing debt and not taking steps necessary over a period of time to put your country on a fiscal path to health. now, i think most of us know here that we have to make some tough choices and it's going to require political will in order for us to address this. we've been avoiding this for years. expoo we're going to face a debt-induced catastrophe if we don't address it and drean addrt soon. so when you're faced with this kind of fiscal mess, what do you do? well, what families and pise businesses all across america have had to do when they face these types of situatio
and corporations. yet my friends on the other side my friends continue pushing this approach in the name of deficit reduction, but their own leadership admitted we don't have a debt crisis in the country. the architect, congressman paul ryan, said we don't have a debt crisis. speaker boehner said it's not an immediate problem. why should we enact this budget while democrats have a balanced approach to protect the middle class. why should we pass a budget that gets 66% of its cuts from programs for people of low or moderate income. why should we pass a budget that cuts pell grants that helps students or cuts the snap program that helps to feed 48 million people to give a $200,000 tax cut to millionaires? the budget put forward by the congressional black caucus continues the snap program to prevent americans from going hungry. while at the same time, reducing the deficit by $2.8 trillion over 10 years. the american people know we can't cut our way to prosperity, nor can we succeed by pursuing the same failed policies that undermine our economic recovery. the congressional black caucus budget offers a
federal revenues should be changed, deficits, public debt and debt held by the public. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mrs. murray: i ask unanimous consent the following members of my budget committee staff be granted full floor access for the duration of the consideration of s. con. res. -- john rider and rick jones. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mrs. murray: finally, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the period of debate for economic goals and policy under section 305-b of the congressional budget act occur on march 21 at a time to be determined by the two managers. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mrs. murray: thank you, mr. president. we are now on the floor of the senate with the budget. i want to thank my counterpart, mr. sessions, for all his work and his staff's work and my staff's to get us to the point here that we are debating this bill and this amendment. senator sessions has been very gracious in working with us. we have gotten to this. we obviously have differences of opinion, but i want to commend
for two minutes. ms. castor: democrats and republicans agree that deficit reduction is important. in fact, over the past year and a half we have achieved over $2.7 trillion in debt reduction. now the republicans want to take us through a charade with this tea party budget. if enacted, the republican budget would weaken america's recovery. it would undermine what makes america great and what makes america strong. like education, the ability of students to attend college, medical research and inthe noah vation, the about of -- ability of our older neighbors to live their lives in dignity in their retirement years through medicare and long-term care. now we get a lot of advice and economists across the board, in fact, our own congressional budget office, advise that the best and fastest way to reduce the deficit to is to make sure people across america have jobs and are working. it is inexplicable that the republican budget proposes to eliminate jobs in construction, in education, scientific research, and instead heaps the burden on middle class families. experts predict the republican budge
. this is something that every family in america is asking us to focus on. number two, we need to tackle our deficit and debt fairly and responsibly. as democrats, we understand that is a responsibility that we bear today and we do it in this budget. and number three, we need to keep the promises we made as a nation to our seniors and our families and our communities. many who have struggled so much over the last few years and are counting on us to be there for them again now. mr. president, we'll be hearing a lot more about all these principles today and we're going to discuss the stark contrast between the budget that is expected to move in the house of representatives today and the plan and path forward that we have put forward here in the senate as democrats. mr. president, i will yield to senator sessions for his opening remarks, and we will continue this debate throughout the day. mr. sessions: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mr. sessions: i thank the chair and would express my appreciation to senator murray for her leadership and who are courtesy and her skill
2011 budget specifically targeted federal grants for first responders as a way of cutting the deficit. >> he's taking advantage of a sad fact in this country. if you live in illinois in a part of chicago that is fluent, even the gun violence taking place in chicago, in your very city, doesn't impact you. so you may not think that urban crime is a reason to change gun control laws, because it doesn't affect you personally. you can literally live away from where people are kill and not have gun violence affect you. and gun control laws wouldn't get at that crime. maybe the trafficking piece, it's a much more complicated issue. wayne lapierre is taking advantage of that. to your point, it's not as if congress is trying to do anything about that. not trying to do the things they could do about urban crime. >> mental health, a lot of that is aided by the affordable care act. and governor, joy makes a good point. if you look at support for stricter gun laws among african-americans, 78% of them support stronger controls, compared with 48% of caucasians, support for stricter gun laws among ur
and leave a nearly $6 trillion hole in the deficit that would lead to tax increases for middle-income families. that isn't balance. that is total imbalance. at the same time, republicans propose cutting $3.3 trillion from programs for people with low and moderate incomes, including hundreds of billions of dollars for food nutrition and medicaid programs. so i want to end by asking the republicans when they come and talk about their tax proposals to name a specific that they would address. it's not in the republican budget. name one, name two, name three. otherwise, it's worse than empty. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: with that, mr. chairman, i yield three members to the gentleman from indiana, r. rokita. mr. rokita: i thank chairman ryan in bringing this budget to the floor. i rise in high support of it. i also am very proud, one of the highest honors i have had in my short time here to serve on this committee. not because of chairman ryan only, but because of the members. by members, i mean republican and democrat mem
to work, taking a shared responsibility approach to our long-term deficits so we bring them down in a balanced smart way and they rejected the idea that we're going to move the economy forward by giving windfall tax cuts to the very wealthiest in the country and the benefits of that would trickle down and lift everybody up. they rejected that lopsided approach that balance the budgets on the backs of everybody but the folks at the very top. balance the budget on the backs of our kids' education by slashing important investments. in that category of spending we make these important investments for our country and our future, they double the cut from the sequester. so those are our investments in our kids' education. those are our investments in science and research to help power our economy. those are our investments to help modernize our infrastructure. they cut transportation by 15% when we have 15% unemployment in the construction industry. so mr. chairman, the american people rejected the kind of uncompromising lopsided approach that we see once again presented here in the hou
nation that does not -- is not riddled with debt and deficit, but also a nation that continues to be the economic leader in the world. and i believe our plan makes -- protects those investments in those key components of growth. and i hope over the coming hours that we will go through this debate and -- and i know we'll have a spirited period of a lot of amendments. this -- this budget i believe will pass and it will have to then find agreement with our colleagues in the house. and i just want to again commend both the chair and, for that matter, the ranking member. at the end of the day, we have to find common agreement to get this done. this issue that hovers all over of our other debates has become a metaphor as to whether our institutions can if you please in the 2 1*9 century. so just as the chair and rank member found agreement through a markup process where both sides were heard and amendments were offered and debated in a fair and open process, i want to both thank the chair and rank member for their commitment. they have different idead about how we get there, but at t
the deficit by 25% and have cut immigration by a third. we have a long, hard road to travel, but we are going in the right direction. >> hear, hear. >> mr. james morris. >> i am sure that the prime minister will wish to add his condolences to the family and friends of christina edkins, who was murdered on a bus to school in my constituency last morning. the government have rightly introduced minimum custodial sentences for people convicted of threatening someone with a knife, but does the prime minister agree that it is time to introduce a legal assumption that people carrying a knife intend to use it and should attract a prison sentence, so that we can redouble our efforts to rid our communities of the scourge of knives? >> hear, hear. >> i think that my honorable friend speaks for the whole house and, indeed, the whole country on the absolute revulsion at this horrific crime. i know that the whole house will sincere condolences to christina edkins's family. we take knife crime extremely seriously, which is why, as my honorable friend has said, we changed the law so that any adult who commit
independent office of budget responsibility are absolutely clear that the deficit reduction plan is not responsible for low growth." this is not what they say and will he acknowledge that today? >> returning to his earlier interesting thing about british politics right now is i've got the top team i want and he's got the top team that i want, too. long may they continue. now on the issue of the office of budget responsibility, the point of the obra is that it is independent and everyone should accept everything that it says and i do. but we should look at what it says about why growth has turned out to be lower than it forecast. it said this. we concluded from an examination of the data that the impact of external financial shocks deteriorating export markets and financial sector and eurozone faculties were the more likely explanations. that is what they said. the shadowair to chancellor, in his own press release, he said that the obr has yet to be persuaded if i have to tell him, his plan of more spending and more borrowing and more debt, the country will never he persuaded. >>
and better jobs for the american people. after all the budgets that never balance and record deficits, job creation, we would be coming off the four best years in modmodern american history, because we had four $1 trillion deficits in a row. another that will, quote, only be $850 billion this year. that's yielded us less than 2% growth a year. we all know if we took the number of americans that have left the work force and recalculated unemployment rate, it wouldn't be 7.8%, it would be about 10.5%. the path that my friends on the other side recommend doesn't work. and the balance in both the r.s.c. budget and ryan budget are much more promising course. they achieve that balance by not raising taxes, while not raising taxes. i think that's very important, too. we certainly aren't undertaxed in this country. my friends on the other side clearly believe that we are. they are going to offer multiple tax increases in all their budgets. i like the budget that does not require tax increases. finally, both these budgets, the republican study committee budget and the republican budget, come to gri
the deficit and invest in the middle class, not be used just to simply cut tax rates for the rich the way that the house budget did. so, mr. president, we have a few more hours of debate this morning between now and 11:00, followed by some votes, and then we will close out debate and move on to all the rest of the votes that we will take before final passage sometime late tonight or early tomorrow morning. i ask the senate -- as the senate majority leader said, we have hundreds of amendments filed. if we were to vote on every one of them, we would be here voting every single hour all the way through monday or tuesday. i know most members know that's not going to happen. so i would really encourage every member of the senate to work with the manager on their side to let us know which amendments are your priority so we can get them up sooner rather than later and vote on the ones that you want us to. so i urge all of our colleagues to work with us and our staffs and with ranking member sessions and his staff to make sure we know what your priorities are, how you would like to proceed, and w
budget. they now claim their budget would eliminate the deficit in 2023. and house budget committee chairman paul ryan has even said that it doesn't really matter how their budget eliminates the deficit. mr. president, americans across our country who will feel the impact of the choices we make in the coming weeks and months feel that it does matter. so while some of my republican colleagues would probably prefer not to hear about it, i think that the impact of the house republican budget is a crucial part of this debate, and we owe it to the american people to put our opinions on the record. now we've come a long way, mr. president, but there are still far too many americans today who are unemployed or underemployed, which is why our senate budget's first priority is boosting our economic recovery. speaker boehner has actually agreed with president obama that our debt does not present -- quote -- "an immediate crisis." so you might think the house budget would phase in cuts responsibly so we can protect our fragile recovery. well, instead the house republican budget would do seriou
that america does have a debt and deficit problem and we need to take it very seriously. the fact is, the vast majority of our debt problems relate to the costs of health care in america. now that the debate over obama care is over, we should start thinking about how to get america's health care costs under control. as it turns out, two new works, a book and a magazine cover story provide some very useful ways to think about it. the central debate between democrats and republicans is over whether the free market works well in health care. in a new book, catastrophic care, david goldhill makes the case for the market arguing that people need to become consumers of health care so that they, not insurance companies, not the government, actually see, feel and pay the bills. that will force producers of health care, doctors and hospitals, to push down prices and drive up quality. that's what happens with groceries and television sets and computers. lasiks surgery which is not covered by health insurance, has seen a 90% drop in price and increase in quality since it was introduced in the 1990s. that
a debt and deficit problem and we need to take it very seriously. the fact is that the vast majority of our problem is related to the cost of health care in america. now the debate over obama care is over, we should start to think seriously of how to get america's health care costs under control. as it turns out a book and magazine story provide ways to think of this. the central debate between republicans and democrats is over whether the free market works well in health care. in a new book catastrophic care, they make the case arguing people need ito become consumers of health care so they, not insurance companies or the government, actually see, feel and pay the bill. that will force producers of health care, doctors and hospitals to push down prices and drive up quality. that's what happens with groceries, tv sets or computers. and basic surgery has seen a 90% drop in price and increase in quality since it was introduced in the '90s. that's what happens when consumers pay for a product. steven makes the opposite case in a recover story in "time" magazine. he painstakingly went th
's this job that has seen the deficit come down by a third since he became chancellor. and private sector jobs. he's cutting the country out of a whole we were left in by the party opposite. [cheering and applause] [inaudible] >> the prime minister welcome. the country's first local enterprise fund people who care have raised 400,000 pounds to invest in businesses and encouraging enterprise securing employment and in so many others where they lead the rest of the country -- [inaudible] i'm sure my friend is right about that the leadership of all things. he makes an important point, need to see more small businesses start, more enterprise. we need to see more to keep the private sector going. >> alex cunningham. >> rising unemployment remains an issue in my constituency. based on the reemployment and recession which claims hard working families in the most vulnerable for the obscene tax for millionaires. [cheering and applause] -- looks at the figures today he'll see there are 131,000 more people in work over the last quarter, we have seen 600,000 more people employed compared with a year ago,
dollars loss, so to the degree that revenues come in lower than expected, the deficit would be larger, so there is some sensitivity here. >> and that's 134 million over five years? >> over five years, that's right. >> got it, thanks. >> so, going back to just in term of what compromises that 578 million dollars of revenue growth, the largest portion of that being our property tax which is our largest overall local revenue source, though business taxes and our hotel and sales taxes are as growing over that time period. this slide highlights for you wla the projected growth rates are in the plan, so you can see, you know, stronger growth rates in the early first two years and more moderate projections in the subsequent years. on the expenditure side, our -- the city's expenditures are projected to increase by 1.1 billion dollars over the five year period, that's about 25% growth, and the largest share of that is our salary and fringe benefit costs which are growing we're projecting 460 million dollars, there are a number of citywide cost increase that is are assumed in this plan, things lik
's a proposed 50 million dollar budget deficit from the department of public health, how does this proposed increase impact that because i'm assuming this is something based on what's been communicated to me around the department of public health, this is a consistent issue and so when we look at potential growth, are we looking at the fact that we're also absorbing the deficit or we will maybe need to absorb the deficit of the department? >> that's an excellent question, so included in that first number on the page, the 141.9 million dollars is our best projection of what that supplemental will cost the city next year, so that number includes the operating shortfall that they're experiencing this dwraoer and how that affects next year, so it's reflected here on the -- in the shortfall projection. >> so, which is why there's still -- >> 57 million dollar shortfall to start with. >> thank you. >> i think what's important to think about the health department, the department will be before you in two weeks to talk about this in more depth along with issues related to the supplemental, is that
, there is a budget, and it is well-done. and it has strong deficit reduction and strong investments. it's balanced in a way that the ryan plan is not. it saves medicare where he destroys it. it invests in education and infrastructure, where he destroys that. his budget budget is a wrecking. our budget, you should the able leadership of senator murray, is a path of -- an optimistic path to our future, not a pessimistic, painful plan that mr. ryan has put forward in the name of the republican parliamentarparty.now, you are a filibuster, and it is possible that we could end it, but i will tell you this: we are trying for some friendship and comity across the aisle right now. we want to keep the government open. okay, so the senator from kansas stood here last night and said, the reason he is filibustering -- he never used that word, but the reason he is insisting that we spend 30 more hours, 40 more hours, 50 more hours on this, last year's business, which is last year' year's appropriation, is because he demands to have a vote on his amendment that he feels very strongly about. and it has to do with
problems. we've now cut the deficit not by a quarter, but by a third. we've helped business create not a million new jobs, but one and a quarter million new jobs. we've kept interest rates at record lows. but mr. deputy speaker, despite the progress we've made, there's much more to do. today, i'm going to level with people about the difficult economic circumstances we still face and the hard decisions required to deal with them. it is taking longer than anyone hoped, but we must hold to the right track. and by setting free the aspirations of the nation, we will get there. our economic plan combines monetary activism with fiscal responsibility and supply side reform. and today we go further on all three components of that plan: monetary, fiscal, and supply side reform. but we also understand something else more fundamental. our nation is in a global race competing alongside new centres of enterprise around the world for investment and jobs that can move anywhere. building a modern reformed state to drivefford. businesses overseas with taxes getting more and more uncompetitive. .o le
differences. let's take a look at them. the gop plan would cut the deficit $4.6 trillion over ten years, all through spending cuts. the democratic plan would cut the deficit $1.8 trillion half through spending cuts and half through tax hikes. senator corker, let me start with you will senate republicans accept a tax increase if you get serious entitlement reform and cuts? >> i think senate republicans and all republicans want to see a 75 year solution to entitlements and i think republicans are joined in wanting to see tax reform so to the extent that generates revenues and how that is scored obviously that will be debated as we move ahead but i think all of us understand the real issues driving the deficit is in our o country are the entitlements. we want to see these available for generations to come. >> chris: but real quickly you you understand the price for entitlement reform in any deal would be a tax increase. would you buy that and what do you think are the prospects there willle be a deal sometime before this summer? >> well, again, i think there by the way is a chance on a deal. i
the federal budget surplot plus or deficit. obviously it's been some time since we have run anything like a significant budget surplus we went into the recession carrying a farrell substantial deficit and obviously that really ballooned and got much much worse and what we are facing now are really the biggest bulletin deficits that the united states economy has faced since the second world war we are moving in the right direction it's getling smogger and it's still a farrell daunting challenge and this is what was westbound bend the whole fiscal cliff last year and we ended up with an 11th hour deal to avoid the worst of the fiscal live kcliff and i'm not going to read all of the stuff on this slide but basically what we got was tax increases that effect the working poor primarily and the very affluent and not really not much of an impact on the middle class and you can may be have your own political opinions about that but the spending cuts didn't really take much effect at all. the spending cuts are now poised to go into effect march 1st and to make thing more interesting we run back in
a jobs deficit. we have a budget deficit. and these are the byproducts of a leadership deficit. we still have no budget from the president, in violation of the law. he gets his ncaa bracket in on time but still no budget. this is the fourth time in five years. he set a new record this year, two months with no plan, while we had trillion-dollar deficits and a debt crisis on the horizon. his party leaders, unfortunately, failing offering a serious account of our challenge. no serious plan to grow our economy or create jobs. no plan to ever balance the budget. take more. trillions of dollars more to spend more in washington. that's what got us in this mess in the first place. so what can be done? the good news is that we now have a vehicle for regular order. the democrats derailed the budget process each of the last few years and stopped governing when they stopped budgeting. at least we now have a budget process that's moving. we brought them back in the game this spring. that's a good thing. so what's going to happen in the weeks ahead? well, we will make the case for our priorities. whet
our first order of business will be to get our deficits and debt under control. >> then just this week, a different tone. he said we don't have an immediate crisis in terms of debt. in fact, the next ten years it's going to be a sustainable place." congressman van hollen, why the change? >> it's not a change. they're totally consistent. right now our big problem is to sustain the economic recovery. we've seen momentum in the job market. and the last thing we want to do right now is to put the brakes on that. in fact, one-half of this year's deficit is due to unemployment, the fact that more people aren't at work. so what the president saying our focus right now should be to get people back to work, sustain the recovery, and then reduce the deficit in a measured, balanced way. there's no doubt that we have to do it and the budgets the president will present and the ones we will present will do that. it will put us on a sustained downward trajectory on deficits. but our priority is job growth. >> this is the point, right? his argument is don't get us in the middle of austerity in the nex
these problems that happened. host: we'll leave it there. guest: republicans were hitting deficit spending that the budget that the cr isn't addressing the deficit problem. you put two words on a credit card and didn't pay for them and that's why we have deficit. the war funding is an interesting element. it was a fight between democrats and republicans. democrats cut spending. how they arrived at savings in their bument and republicans said those numbers aren't realistic. host: trnt republicans say thrg have been increases in spending by the obama administration at pushed the debt from five or six years ago guest: how much debt there was when president obama came to office and how much debt there is now. that is the consistent argument it's getting worse. when you compare the ryan budget to the senate democrats budget there is a different pace of spending, both of them increase spending over time but the democrats by a lot more. host: go ahead bob. caller: we won't really know what's in this thing until the cover is pulled off. we can't trust the media to tell us the truth. and you should
of cloud cover. how do we need that rain? very badly. santa rosa is nearly 6.5" in deficit. 5" in deficit in san francisco and more than 3" in deficit in san jose. today we are starting off cool with clear conditions, 30's to mid-40's. the clouds will increase through the afternoon. a mild day with democrats in -- with temperatures in the upper 50's at 4:00, and mid-50's at the coast and upper 50's to low 60's. tomorrow the clouds will be getting thicker and drop rain in the evening. the best chance of rain is tuesday night into wednesday morning with lingering showers wednesday afternoon and the day on thursday looks brighter. >> golden gate bridge is free with no road work. it is a nice drive. from the tunnel into san francisco, it is nice. you will not be able to pay cash after the 27th to get across the golden gate bridge. we have a solo spin out in central lafayette westbound 24 to the right shoulder. checking the drive from the central valley right now, it is looking good with a lot of green. that is what we like to see coming up and over the pass into livermore. >> it was a plot ri
and expenditures and then monitors our overall progress on the city's structural deficit. as you'll also remember, the five-year plan, it requires that we both present what that gap is and then propose financial strategies about how to eliminate the gap between revenues and expenditures. so, what i thought i would do is kind of walk through some high level assumption and then talk about in more detail about what's going on in the five-year financial outlook, so the plan itself assumes the budget that was adopted last year for 13-14 as the base case in most scenarios, so that means things like our capital funding is assumed at the level that it was adopted in the budget last year, inflation on materials and supplies on grants to non-profits that's assumed at the level it was adopted last year, the one major difference that i would highlight for you now and i'll mention it again later is how we're treating the prop h public education enrichment fund baseline in which we defer to contribution last year in the second year and our projection today assumes that that's fully funded. >> ms. howard, just
to get anything going and that's the way to deal with the deficits, of course. and there were some measures there. no national insurance payments for employees for the first few thousand pounds reducing corporation tax earlier to 20%. infrastructure spending, could it be more? businesses would always want more. but there was acknowledgement he tried while keeping the next fiscally neutral. on the whole, businesses say, not bad, could have done more. i think that will be the summation for them. the key factor, of course, is if you're not going to do more to stimulate your own growth, what happens to the eurozone becomes even more important. and i did speak to the chancellor, george osborne, just a short while ago and i asked him how worried is he about what's going on in cypress? this is what he had to say. >> it is a worrying situation in cypress and i think there's been some sole rans in international markets and elsewhere that they've got to sort these problems out. but obviously, we now need a solution. if i would have concerns if these depositors, less than a hundred thousand e
deficits with no end in sight doesn't lead to prosperity, doesn't lead to growth. it leads to financial ruin. i'm also the father of four great kids, two in college and two in high school. they know that as a family they have to plan ahead for the future. we need to create a budget and then live within our means. these are the same principles that my parents past down to me. -- passed down to me. these are the values that montana's families live by each and every day. those values are exemplified in montana's own state legislature. we're the only constitutionally -- where the only constitutionally required duletty is passing a budget. in -- duty is passing a budget. in fact, when they adjourn in a little over a montana, they will have given montana a balanced budget, just like they did last year and the year before and the year before that. it seems simple -- live within your means, spend no more than you take in, but it's not so easy here in washington. right now we are presented with two very different visions for our country, two visions that will lead to two very different outcomes
. melissa: we are running an enormous deficit, towns and cities and municipalities. what are the other solutions? and we privatize? could we privatize infrastructure somehow? because i don't know where we will come up with the money to fix it. >> when you think about water, it is the users that should be paying for the use of it. there should be a user fee for it. a lot of municipalities have that. but unfortunately, they have not been keeping pace with inflation to provide the repairs that are needed. melissa: it is interesting that the place where we earned the highest grade was aab. and that have to do with solid waste and thamount that we are recyclg and composting in this country. is that the only bright point. >> there were so many bad grades. but we did see six categories actually go up this time from the 2009 report card. in those areas, there were investment. the listeners can see that report card. melissa: thank you so much for comi on. i feel like i should think of a private solution. now it is time for today's report. cyprus is going to avoid a collapse. they settled 1.5%,
level. secondarily, if you say deficit reduction, the partisan are leeched out. we are talking about whether it will work to balance the budget. if along the way 35 million become uninsured, that's sad but we don't talk about it because cbo didn't mention it in the score. that's the great trick of paul ryan to recognize if you only talk about budget deficit, where does your budget put the deficit 20, 30 years from now, the amount of things you sneak in under that cloak that you can never put into the conversation in a serious way in normal times is tremendous. that's the central political innovation of his career. >> the favorite thing in the accounting discussion is compare the government to a family, saying you couldn't -- well, families do run debt, they cannot afford to buy their houses for cash, so they have a thing called a mortgage, which is the national debt of the family in effect. they try to oversimplify everything in this, but is there some break through in this point of republicans saying you know what, the debt isn't such a serious problem? >> there's no break through.
deficit by almost $6 trillion in 10 years. reduce ay budget would little under $2 trillion in 10 years. >> what other groups are offering their own budget plan docks water they likely to focus on? >> -- who will be issuing their own budget plans? budget will be similar to patty murray's budget in the senate. increases,ave tax but neither would balance the budget in 10 years. also the congressional black caucus and the congressional progressive caucus will be introducing budget. it's possible a ryan version could be introduced in the senate. >> what is likely to happen in the senate this week? >> it will be democrats making the case for the patty murray budget. convince someto democratic senators who may not support that budget. they will have to sell it to democratic senators as well as republicans. no republicans are likely to vote for the budget. they will be calling for more spending cuts, no tax increases, balancing the budget sooner. >> republicans say this to be the first time in four years they have agreed to put forward a plan. why is this your difference? are a number of diffe
through a state where wisconsin had faced a multibillion dollar budget deficit, we were having double-digit tax increases, and we saw some of the record job loss that we've seen in the past. so what did we do? we came in and took that deficit, $3.6 billion, and today it's nearly half a billion dollar surplus. we took up -- [applause] we took a state where taxes had gone up, and we not only lowered the overall tax burden for the first time in years, property taxes on a median value home had gone town in each of the last two years. [applause] and when it comes, and when it comes to jobs under my predecessor's term, wisconsin had lost 133,000 jobs, and back in 2010 a survey showed just 10% of our employers thought we were headed in the right direction. today we're gaining jobs and 93% of our employers say wisconsin is heading in the right direction. we can lead with an optimistic message. [applause] simply put, we showed in our election that when people realized the debate was between who do you want in charge, the big government special interests n this case the employee unions, or do y
reduce unemployment to nearly five -- two near 5% and three years. it would reduce the deficit by $4.4 trillion over 10 years. and it would strengthen medicare and medicaid amah and you'd be asking the wealthy to pay their fair share. -- medicare and medicaid and you would be asking the wealthy to pay their fair share. guest: the institute of policy analysis estimated that you are spending money on infrastructure. we have a to point to dollar trillion infrastructure deficit, according to the transportation -- american society of civil engineers. building roads, highways, bridges, etc. you put people to work building schools and other necessary things. you give money to the states. the states have laid off 700,000 cops, firefighters, and teachers. you give money to states for couple years to rehire them. those kinds of things add up. by doing all this, you stimulate the economy. that means the private sector generates more jobs. it comes to about 7 million altogether. host: what do you consider fair share when it comes to wealthy taxpayers? guest: we propose two different things. numb
to reduce the deficit. unfortunately, rather than seriously considering the credible path that we have presented in our budget plan, some republicans have decided to play some games with the numbers, and they just are not telling the truth. instead of subtracting the sequestration replacement portion in the investment package from the $975 billion in total revenue, they're trying to say that you should somehow add them all together. they are taking one side of the ledger, combining it with the other side of the ledger and coming to some conclusion that makes absolutely no sense to us. mr. president, this would be like handing over $2 to buy a cup of coffee and having someone say, well the price was actually $2 plus the value of that coffee. it doesn't make any sense. and, by the way, you don't have to take my word for it. fact checkers and reporters have called this claim false and a step too far. and "the washington post" fact correcter even gave it two pinocchios. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to insert in the record a story from "the washington post" on this inaccurate clai
at some of the people to solve the leadership deficit, chris christie, marco rubio, we have a cast of characters for the 2016 race that's different than the cast of characters in the 2012 race, so i think there's a little silver lining in that for republicans. >> let's listen to what jay carney had to say about the new republican report. >> the best way to increase support with the public for your party is to embrace policies to public supports. >> howard fineman, jay carney makes sense every once in a while. >> and he did right there. and this report from rnc read like a soviet five-year plan. we will have more production and we are going to reach out to the ethnic minorities that we don't understand. it had very little relationship to reality, except there was a distant sound of their realization that for example on gay rights, they're way, way wrong. hillary clinton today came out in favor of supporting gay marriage. young people in the rnc's own report, young people are the ones leading the way on that. i'll give reince priebus credit for saying in that report that the issue of
to the conservative rationale for budget can you tell us when conservatives get more honest about the debt and deficit. a conservative columnist says about the new ryan budget, it sacrificed seriousness for seriousness by promising to reach budgetary balance, not over the long term as budgets 1.0 and 2.0 did, but in a ten year window. this is not going to happen, and more importantly there's no reason why it needs to happen. modest deficits are perfectly compatible with fiscal responsibility. talk about singing a new tune. and the conservative think tank, the american enterprise institute asks why does the budget need to balance in ten years? debt reduction doesn't require balance, just that the economy is growing faster than the debt, while the plan does put the debt to gdp ratio on a downward trajectory, it probably doesn't need to be quite as steep. ezra klein, this is a big deal, and you're here on this show to prove it is a big deal. you would never come out this late if this wasn't a huge deal. >> absolutely not. >> this is huge. the debt is the reason we have to do all these terrible things to
and then on the deficit this year, the democrat deficit would be 164 billion dollars bigger than the republican deficit. and next year, 308 billion dollars, just to give you a sense of it, by 2015 the republican deficit would be down to 125 billion and the democrat deficit 433 billion. there's a big indication of the difference between the parties when you look at the budgets of the budget blueprints of the republicans in the house and the democrats in senate and republicans want to restrain spending and democrats want to continue to blow up the budget and eventually, over the decade add 1 trillion dollars of new taxes. >> sean: yeah, so 1 trillionew a trillion dollars, this is like they know no other way, all right? that's point one, but yet, they still will give us almost trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see throughout the entire ten-year period. here is the big issue though, i want to see obamacare repealed, but it's not going to happen through paul ryan's budget plan. the republicans, if they want that to happen, to get ryan's plan through, they're going to have to during one of the c
congressman paul ryan a budget. >> this budget more than just balanced. >> can we reduce our deficit and debt and still help those who are neediest in america. can we have a safety net that survives and still reduce the deficit? paul ryan says no. >> at least budgets are passing around here for a change. the government's going to have to learn to do more with less, it's not the government's money, it's the people's money. >> the senate democrats are considering a number of balances ever-- >> and house committee chair paul ryan telling us republicans and democrats are still world's apart. well, that is an understatement. we saw that just an hour ago. the democratic-led senate defeating the ryan house budget 40-59. so is there any hope left? here is congressman paul ryan. >> great to see you. >> great it to see you again. >> greta: i want to talk about the budget that passed today, i imagine you're happy. >> we're very happy. we passed a balanced budget and it's important we owe the country a reasonable plan and grows the economy. balancing the budget is not just a statistical exercise it's the
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 341 (some duplicates have been removed)